M/S. V2 RETAIL LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10, KOLKATA

The appeal is Allowed to

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani

4(a) to Section 43B provides that “public financial institutions” shall have the meaning assigned to it under 11 Section 4A of the Companies Act, 1956. Section 4A of the Companies Act, 1956 is reproduced below:- “[4A. Public financial institutions. – (1) Each of the financial institutions specified in this sub- section shall be regarded, for the purposes of this

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IT & TP) vs. M/S. DONGFANG ELECTRIC CORPORATION

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani

4) stated to have made with the sole intention to get the immunity from imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T Act is in contravention to explanation 5A to section 271(1)(c). That is why undisclosed income of Rs. 10.63 Crore was included in the return of income filed u/s 153A only in pursuant

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S ITC LTD

Bench: The Learned Tribunal – One By The Assessee & The Other By The Revenue Which Have Been Disposed Of By A Common Order, Impugned In This Appeal. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration :

d) is decided against the revenue. 13. The next substantial question of law (e) is with regard to disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D to the tune of Rs.21,16,23,729/-. The Assessing Officer made the disallowance on account of interest paid by invoking Rule 8D(2)(ii) and the rest of disallowance being under Rule

SRI JAHAR MATILAL vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-XVIII & ANR.

The appeal is allowed

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) Date : 13Th August, 2025

D- HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS) DATE : 13th August, 2025 Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Malay Dhar, Adv. Mr. Bhaskar Sengupta, Adv. …for appellant Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. Mr. Ankan Das, Adv. Ms. Shradhya Ghosh, Adv. …for respondents The Court : This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION & TRA vs. JOY PARTNERSHIP MINING CENTRE

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani

4 the respondent assessee to tax. Aggrieved with the reassessment order, the respondent assessee preferred an appeal No.348/CIT(A)-I/C-2/10- 11 before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – I, Kolkata, which was partly allowed by the CIT(A) on merits by its order dated 27.11.2012 and the point taken by the respondent assessee challenging the jurisdiction for reassessment

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 KOLKATA vs. M/S EXIDE INDUSTRIES LTD

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam A N D The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : February 14, 2022. [Via Video Conference] Appearance : Mr. S.N. Dutta, Adv. … For The Appellant Mr. Abhratosh Majumdar, Sr. Adv. Ms. Nilanjana Banerjee Pal, Adv. … For The Respondent The Court : We Have Heard Mr. S.N. Dutta, Learned Standing Counsel Appearing For The Appellant/Revenue & Mr. Abhratosh Majumdar, Learned Senior Counsel, Duly Assisted By Ms. Nilanjana Banerjee Pal, Learned Counsel For The Respondent/Assessee.

D THE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : February 14, 2022. [Via Video Conference] Appearance : Mr. S.N. Dutta, Adv. … for the appellant Mr. Abhratosh Majumdar, Sr. Adv. Ms. Nilanjana Banerjee Pal, Adv. … for the respondent The Court : We have heard Mr. S.N. Dutta, learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant/revenue and Mr. Abhratosh Majumdar, learned senior counsel, duly assisted

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. KANYA KUMARI PROPERTIES LTD

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: : The Hon'Ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj & The Hon’Ble Justice Uday Kumar Date : 9Th January, 2026

disallowance of Rs. 4,73,50,000/- u/s 35(1)(ii) of the Act, made on account of statement provided by the auditor, director and founder of donee research institute? b) WHETHER in facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was not justified in law in allowing the appeal of the assessee

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-14, KOLKATA vs. PKS HOLDINGS

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the question nos

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam

D THE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : 3rd August, 2022. Appearance: Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. ...for the appellant. Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Murarka, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vivek Murarka, Adv. Mr. Dibanath Dey, Adv. ...for the respondent. The Court:- This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, for brevity) is directed against

COMM OF INCOME TAX, (LARGE TAXPAYER UNITS), KOLKATA vs. M/S HINDUSTAN COPPER LIMITED

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

d) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench Kolkata erred in law in holding that the disbursement of the VRS compensation as revenue expenditure and thus they are should not any applicability of in Section 35DDA of the Income Tax Act, 1961?” 3 We have heard Mr. Smarajit

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S M C NALLY SAYAJI ENGINEERING LIMITED

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

D. Whether the Learned Tribunal has committed substantial error in law by not considering that CBDT’s Circular No.22/2015 dated 17.12.2015 which clarified that the Circular does not apply to claim of deduction relating to employees contribution to welfare funds which are governed by Section 30(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ? We have heard Mr. Debasish Chowdhury

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOL-3, KOLKATA vs. SIKARIA INFRAPROJECTS PVT. LTD.

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani

disallowed the various expenses as these were not verified in response to the notice issue under section 133(6) of the Act. But the Id. CIT(A) has 7 treated the income of the assessee @ 8% of the gross receipt. So the Revenue is in appeal before us. Now the question before us arises for adjudication is as to whether

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, KOLKATA vs. KOLKATA ASSAM ROADLINES PVT. LTD.

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam A N D The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date: November 30, 2021. Appearance : Mr. S. Roy Chowdhury, Adv. … For The Appellant The Court : This Appeal By The Revenue Filed Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act, In Brevity) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 5Th April, 2017 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Bench “C”, Kolkata In

D THE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date: November 30, 2021. Appearance : Mr. S. Roy Chowdhury, Adv. … for the appellant The Court : This appeal by the Revenue filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, in brevity) is directed against the order dated 5th April, 2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Bench

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL -1, KOLKATA vs. SHALIMAR PELLET FEEDS LTD.

In the result the appeals in so far as the assessment

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

disallowance of depreciation claim @ 30 % on lorry which are not used for hiring business ? (h) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned Tribunal has erred in quashing the order under Section 263 of the 4 Income Tax Act, 1961 thereby deleting the addition made under Section 153A/143(3) of the Income

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, KOLKATA vs. EXIDE INDUSTRIES LIMITED

Appeal is dismissed as

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY

D E R 1. The present appeal has been filed impugning the order dated March 2, 2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata in ITA No.170/Kol/2013 for the assessment year 2005-06. The appeal was admitted on May 11, 2018 for consideration of the following substantial question of law : “Whether the provision for royalty and technical

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3, KOLKATA vs. BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD.

Bench: This Court Against The Order Dated September 02, 2016 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” Bench, Kolkata For The Assessment Years 2008-09 In I.T.A. No.780/Kol/2013. The Following Substantial Questions Of Law Are Sought To Be Raised: “(A) Whether The In The Facts & Circumstances, Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Erred In Law & In Fact In Quashing The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii, Kolkata Passed Under Section

D” Bench, Kolkata for the Assessment Years 2008-09 in I.T.A. No.780/Kol/2013. The following substantial questions of law are sought to be raised: “(A) Whether the in the facts and circumstances, learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in law and in fact in quashing the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Kolkata passed under Section ITAT No.190

PRINCIPAL COMM OF INCOME TAX, ASANSOL vs. M/S EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD

Accordingly, the appeal fails and it is dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

d) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, was justified in reversing the finding of CIT (Appeals) in deleting the addition

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL -1, KOLKATA vs. SURAJ SAHANA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

4 of 150 IA NO. GA/2/2021 IN ITAT/36/2021 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SILIGURI VERSUS NITIN KUMAR AGARWAL ITAT/57/2021 IA NO: GA/2/2021 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA VERSUS JEMISH SHAH IA NO. GA/2/2021 IN ITAT/58/2021 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA VERSUS SONAL SARAF IA NO. GA/2/2021 IN ITAT/60/2021 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-15, KOLKATA vs. SMT. BABITA AGARWAL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

4 of 150 IA NO. GA/2/2021 IN ITAT/36/2021 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SILIGURI VERSUS NITIN KUMAR AGARWAL ITAT/57/2021 IA NO: GA/2/2021 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA VERSUS JEMISH SHAH IA NO. GA/2/2021 IN ITAT/58/2021 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA VERSUS SONAL SARAF IA NO. GA/2/2021 IN ITAT/60/2021 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA